Challenges of Enforcing Human Rights Across Different Jurisdiction

India, as one of the world’s largest and most diverse democracies, is home to a myriad of legal, cultural, social, and political landscapes. With its vast geographical expanse and a population that includes multiple languages, religions, and ethnicities, enforcing human rights across its various jurisdictions presents unique and often daunting challenges. This complexity is compounded by a legal framework that includes both national and state-level laws, as well as varying interpretations of constitutional principles. In this blog, we will explore the challenges of enforcing human rights across India’s different jurisdictions, with a focus on the legal, institutional, cultural, and socio-political dimensions.

1. Legal and Constitutional Framework

Federal Structure and Division of Powers

India’s federal system of government, which allocates powers between the central government and state governments, is one of the main reasons for the challenges in enforcing human rights uniformly across the country. The Indian Constitution, though a strong document that enshrines fundamental rights in Part III, gives the states significant power to make laws on a variety of issues. This results in differing levels of protection and enforcement of human rights across states.

• State vs. Central Jurisdiction: States can frame laws in areas like education, health, police powers, and even issues related to land and tribal rights. Often, there is inconsistency in the extent to which these rights are protected at the state level. While some states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu have robust human rights protections, others face significant challenges in implementation, particularly in areas with tribal populations or in regions plagued by insurgency.
• Contradictory Laws: In some cases, state laws may conflict with national laws or international human rights standards. For example, certain state-specific laws may limit the freedom of speech and expression, or restrict the right to protest, which can create legal tensions and complicate enforcement.

Role of the Judiciary

India’s judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, has played a pivotal role in upholding human rights. The judiciary has been instrumental in expanding the scope of human rights, through judicial activism, to include socio-economic rights such as the right to food, the right to education, and the right to health. However, the judiciary’s reach is limited by the practical challenges of access to courts, especially in rural or remote areas.

• Access to Justice: The Indian legal system, despite being accessible, often remains out of reach for marginalized communities due to factors like language barriers, financial constraints, and lack of awareness about legal rights.
• Delays and Backlog: The enormous backlog of cases in Indian courts, particularly in lower courts, delays the delivery of justice. While human rights violations may be recognized by courts, victims often face long waits for justice. This delay can erode the effectiveness of legal redress mechanisms.

2. Law Enforcement and Implementation Challenges

Policing and State-Specific Law Enforcement Mechanisms

The enforcement of human rights often depends on the behavior of the police and other law enforcement agencies, which vary considerably across India. The police force is a state subject under the Constitution, meaning that law enforcement practices can differ widely from state to state. In some regions, the police are under-resourced, poorly trained, or influenced by political pressures.

• Excessive Use of Force: The use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies is one of the most common human rights violations in India. Instances of police brutality, custodial deaths, and illegal detentions continue to be reported, particularly in regions experiencing political unrest or insurgencies. States like Jammu & Kashmir, Chhattisgarh, and the North-East have faced systemic issues of human rights violations by the police and military forces.
• Militarization of Civilian Areas: In conflict-prone regions, such as those facing Naxal insurgency or in areas with active ethnic tensions, the deployment of armed forces leads to frequent violations of civil liberties. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), which provides special powers to the military, has been criticized for fostering impunity and a lack of accountability in conflict zones.

Corruption and Lack of Accountability

Corruption within law enforcement and the judiciary is a persistent problem in India, which undermines human rights protection. Police often extort money from victims or refuse to file FIRs (First Information Reports) related to human rights violations. Moreover, there is often little accountability for police misconduct, especially in rural or marginalized areas. This is exacerbated by political interference, where law enforcement may prioritize party loyalty over impartial justice.

3. Socio-Cultural Barriers

Discrimination Based on Caste, Religion, and Gender

India’s diverse social fabric is a major factor in the challenges faced in enforcing human rights. Social hierarchies based on caste, religion, gender, and ethnicity continue to persist in many parts of the country, affecting the ability of marginalized communities to access their rights.

• Caste-based Discrimination: The Dalit community and other scheduled castes (SCs) and (STs) face systemic discrimination in many parts of India. This is evident in the denial of basic services, access to education, and healthcare, and in violent caste-based atrocities. Especially in rural areas. Despite the enactment of laws like the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, enforcement is often weak, and offenders frequently go unpunished.
• Gender-based Violence: Women, particularly from marginalized communities, often face significant barriers to accessing justice. While India has made strides with laws such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (2005) and the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (2013) in response to gender-based violence, enforcement remains weak. Victims of rape, domestic abuse, and trafficking often face social stigmas, police indifference, and lengthy legal processes that discourage them from seeking redress.
• Religious Discrimination: Indigenous people, often face discrimination in housing, employment, and educational opportunities. Communal violence, fueled by religious tensions, continues to plague several regions of India. The legal response to such violence has been inconsistent. With cases of impunity and a lack of accountability in the prosecution of perpetrators.

Lack of Awareness and Education

Many human rights violations go unchallenged simply because the victims are unaware of their rights. The lack of education, particularly in rural areas, combined with widespread illiteracy. Creates a knowledge gap that leaves many people unable to assert their rights effectively. This gap is even wider in marginalized communities like indigenous groups, migrant workers, and slum dwellers. Who often remain excluded from mainstream legal and political processes.

4. Political Challenges and Political Will

Politicization of Human Rights

Human rights enforcement in India is often subject to political considerations. Political parties may selectively prioritize human rights issues based on electoral calculations. Human rights violations are frequently downplayed or ignored when they occur in regions controlled by opposition parties, or where the violation serves the interests of the ruling party. This politicization makes the enforcement of human rights a highly contested issue, undermining efforts for impartial justice.

• Regionalism and Separatism: In some states, particularly in the North-East and Jammu & Kashmir. There are ongoing separatist movements, where human rights are often violated in the context of counterinsurgency operations. The Indian government’s approach to such regions often raises human rights concerns. Especially when policies are framed as part of national security measures.
• Populist Governments: Under populist governments. The protection of human rights sometimes takes a backseat to economic development or maintaining law and order. Pursuit of “economic growth at all costs” can lead to the displacement of communities, exploitation of workers, and environmental degradation. Often at the expense of indigenous populations.

5. International Human Rights Obligations vs. National Sovereignty

India is a signatory to several international human rights treaties and conventions. Such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). However, India has been reluctant to adopt certain international human rights norms into domestic law, citing national sovereignty concerns.

• Lack of Binding International Mechanisms: While India is part of the UN system. It does not always comply with international human rights judgments or mechanisms that are outside national courts. This presents a dilemma for human rights organizations. As they must balance international advocacy with the realities of domestic law and political constraints.

Conclusion

The challenges of enforcing human rights across different jurisdictions in India are vast and multifaceted. While India has made significant strides in ensuring legal protection for human rights through its Constitution and judicial activism. The country continues to face challenges in the practical enforcement of these rights. Disparities in state-level law enforcement, cultural and social barriers, political influences, and a lack of resources. All contribute to the complexities of ensuring human rights protection for all citizens.

The road ahead requires a concerted effort from multiple stakeholders. Government agencies, civil society organizations, and the judiciary—to address these challenges. While there is hope through legal reforms, greater political will, and improved social awareness. Human rights enforcement in India must become a more consistent and inclusive process to ensure that every citizen. Regardless of region, caste, gender, or religion, can exercise their fundamental rights.